> Nice work, China: this is pretty much the most effective indictment I can imagine of Cameron's idiotic response.
I agree, but they'll probably claim it's different when they are the ones doing it. After all, they only want to silence rioters, while China wants to silence protesters.
Another reason why far reaching demands for censorship from government officials are a very bad idea: You lose all the little leverage you had over countries like China when you demand less censorship from them. They will just point at the statements and accuse you of hypocrisy. European politicians will be laughed out of the building when they come to China with demands of less censorship.
China to UK, "Would you like knowledge sharing? We have plenty of experience in hanging and executing civilian."
"Hell yes, we surely need that knowledge. Next time around we are going to let the riots run its course and then use your experience to hang as many as we can.", UK to China.
UK is supposed to be one of the most socially advanced countries in the world. It is sad that Cameron has to give out such comments and China...there are no words for what china ever does.
Their parliament seems to have been effective in prohibiting that use of footage of parliament be used for parody. [see recent blackout of a John Stewart segment]
Of course they would ... I can understand why China, as the government entity, benefits from a strict control of information flow, but that still doesn't mean that people benefit. If a billion people one day decided to throw a revolt, that would be very troubling for China and the rest of us, so securing peace in the country is important, but not this way.
I really wish countries wouldn't fuel China's fire(wall). Statements like this by idiotic prime ministers and presidents, etc. just make it seem like the fight toward freedom of information is one not really worth fighting for when its not in a particular politician's best interest.
[+] [-] gmac|14 years ago|reply
Nice work, China: this is pretty much the most effective indictment I can imagine of Cameron's idiotic response.
[+] [-] Natsu|14 years ago|reply
I agree, but they'll probably claim it's different when they are the ones doing it. After all, they only want to silence rioters, while China wants to silence protesters.
Or something absurd like that.
[+] [-] ugh|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Kolya|14 years ago|reply
The relationship between Xinhua and the Chinese government is complicated. Treating them as synonymous is a little clumsy.
[+] [-] shriphani|14 years ago|reply
-- Douglas Adams.
[+] [-] rohern|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] drieddust|14 years ago|reply
"Hell yes, we surely need that knowledge. Next time around we are going to let the riots run its course and then use your experience to hang as many as we can.", UK to China.
[+] [-] yaswanth|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] MediaBehavior|14 years ago|reply
Their parliament seems to have been effective in prohibiting that use of footage of parliament be used for parody. [see recent blackout of a John Stewart segment]
[+] [-] kirillzubovsky|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jdelsman|14 years ago|reply
That is exactly what is happening in China...
[+] [-] flocial|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] buddylw|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] drungli|14 years ago|reply